427 replies to this topic

[Lukoi Banacek]

How To Get Folks To Run More Medium Mechs?


C-bill bonus. And I play plenty of mediums (of the 14 mechs I have with over 100 matches, almost half are mediums). If they're the workhorse of the BT universe, let's increase their wages

[Johnny Reb]

Ghogiel, on 18 October 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

I am a 5 W/L and +3 KDR in my shawk tonight. My Bj stats are pretty good for a 45tonner. I do alright in them, doesn't change the fact that heavies and assaults are better.

Well...yeah, In an environment where bigger = better why wouldn't that be the case.

edit: talk about a total failure from PGI, which that was a goal in the beginning. All classes had a role/worth.

Edited by Johnny Reb, 18 October 2013 - 08:39 PM.

[Ghogiel]

Johnny Reb, on 18 October 2013 - 08:36 PM, said:

Well...yeah, In an environment where bigger = better why wouldn't that be the case.

I was commenting in relation to players saying> mediums are fine! I dis 1k damage once in my KTO

[Johnny Reb]

Heh, well mediums are not fine. They are the least fine of any weight! Unless you play a light as a med. (Cicada)

[Joseph Mallan]

Lukoi, on 18 October 2013 - 08:24 PM, said:

How To Get Folks To Run More Medium Mechs?


C-bill bonus. And I play plenty of mediums (of the 14 mechs I have with over 100 matches, almost half are mediums). If they're the workhorse of the BT universe, let's increase their wages

More like give me a Medium and a Couple million to customize it. And I will put it in my Bay. But if I am going to drop I am going to drop in what I like, not what the rest of the community wants me to drop in.

[Appogee]

Mediums are fun. Pilot them well and they can be just as rewarding as a Heavy.

Once tonnage limits are introduced, there will be plenty of reason to play them, and those of us who are experienced in playing them will be glad we took the time to master them as a class.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Why do people want to make medium's the "grinding c-bill's mech".

I don't understand that thought process.

The game SHOULD be about taking and holding planets once CW comes in. So it's not about grinding C-Bill's it's about optimizing your defense and offense.

Medium mechs do not fit into that equation.

[Vassago Rain]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 October 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

Why do people want to make medium's the "grinding c-bill's mech".

I don't understand that thought process.

The game SHOULD be about taking and holding planets once CW comes in. So it's not about grinding C-Bill's it's about optimizing your defense and offense.

Medium mechs do not fit into that equation.

Because no one here is dumb enough to suggest that a 50 tonner will ever equal the speed of a 35 tonner, or the utility of a 50+ tonner.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Vassago Rain, on 19 October 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Because no one here is dumb enough to suggest that a 50 tonner will ever equal the speed of a 35 tonner, or the utility of a 50+ tonner.

The thing that really bothers me is that fixing medium's is very simple.

First thing is fix freaking scaling. And stop releasing new mechs that fail at scaling.

Second is to make all medium hitboxes mimic the Centurion.

Yeah it's not the prettiest fix in the world, but at least Medium's suddenly as a whole become a lot harder to kill without having to create crazy mechanics.

[Captain Stiffy]

They should increase turning and maneuverability on mediums.

[Orodain]

Mediums needs a rescale not some bs gimmick.

Theyre as large as heavy but as slow as them as well. Increasing some of the agility of the mediums could also do the job.

[Victor Morson]

WEIGHT / BV LIMITS.

We've said so since day -100 or before.

Orodain, on 09 November 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Mediums needs a rescale not some bs gimmick.

Theyre as large as heavy but as slow as them as well. Increasing some of the agility of the mediums could also do the job.

Here's the problem - while Mediums have advantages others do not have, sure, they will always be inferior to heavies/assaults in a MechWarrior game unless they abandon BattleTech rules entirely.

Heavies just carry too much firepower, too much armor and can do well enough for speed it renders the medium moot. The reason mediums EVER show up in the core game is because of equipment lists and BV.

Anyone who thinks they can make mediums equal to assaults in MW:O without completely throwing most everything BT out the window is not thinking this through. That's why we need have badly needed weight limits, so they are powerhouses on the field but in limited number. In these situations, mediums become the MOST powerful aspect, because they move in packs.

Edited by Victor Morson, 09 November 2013 - 06:47 PM.

[LordBraxton]

I would really love to see a BV system, but we never will because the arguments over cost\balance would never end.

IF BV existed, even standard heatsinks could be a viable choice, you could try builds with minimal upgrades to get the most value for your team.

[Victor Morson]

LordBraxton, on 09 November 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

I would really love to see a BV system, but we never will because the arguments over cost\balance would never end.

IF BV existed, even standard heatsinks could be a viable choice, you could try builds with minimal upgrades to get the most value for your team.

Absolutely.

The only game to even approach that dynamic was Living Legends, and it resulted in really awesome "High weight, low tier" and "Much lighter, high tier" match offs.

Pitting T1 non-Endo Atlas vs T2 Shadowhawks for the same value would be an honest to God tactical consideration.

EDIT: Also BV boating modifiers > Ghost Heat a million times over.

Edited by Victor Morson, 09 November 2013 - 09:36 PM.

[YueFei]

Vassago Rain, on 19 October 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Because no one here is dumb enough to suggest that a 50 tonner will ever equal the speed of a 35 tonner, or the utility of a 50+ tonner.

The problem is Mediums get the least additional benefit from additional engine weight of all the weight classes. Someone did a graph showing that the progression is not linear, and there is a sudden drop-off for Mediums. Thus, Mediums are only a tiny bit faster than comparably-built Heavies.

But with a large enough map, the 50 tonners do have a slight speed edge over their bigger brothers that might make a difference. An AC/20 Hunchback will run about 8 kph faster than an AC/20 Cataphract. But the Hunchback has the disadvantage of carrying less armor, less heat sinks, and no jump jets. The 8 kph edge makes hardly any difference in a 300 meter sprint. But in a 3000 meter jaunt the Hunchback would be able to arrive 12 seconds sooner than the Cataphract. Enough to fire 3 volleys.

That edge in speed is only meaningful if the map is large enough, and contains multiple objectives, such that you have the opportunity to shift the balance of your forces. If you suddenly need an AC/20 toting mech somewhere else on the map, a Hunchback would get there a few seconds faster. Maybe that's enough of an edge to consider taking the Hunchback instead of the Cataphract.

[Clownwarlord]

I am not sure this needs to be a thread anymore ... kintaro a light hunter like no other ... hunchy with AC20? Now a shadow hawk that does the same but you get jjs as well? I ask why does there need to be anything done to boost medium mech players in the game it is already turning in the right direction with adding more mechs that have options like these.

Also what is a medium mechs role in the game? A sniper (one gauss rifle... er large ... or ppc?), a light mech hunter (multiple streaks witha bap?), or is it a support brawler (high dps build with mgs, medium lasers, and missiles in streaks or srms?). They have a multiple roles but the only reason why you don't see more of them but more heavies and assaults is because people like playing heavies and assaults more ... bigger mechs means bigger weapons or more weapons and most people (not all) just like to feel the power at their finger tips ... or as it has been depicted ...

[Victor Morson]

Vassago Rain, on 19 October 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Because no one here is dumb enough to suggest that a 50 tonner will ever equal the speed of a 35 tonner, or the utility of a 50+ tonner.

Except there are multiple 50 tonners that match the speed of 35 tonners, like Centurion 9Ds and Treb 3Cs. So consider me dumb enough to suggest it!

clownwarlord, on 10 November 2013 - 01:05 AM, said:

Also what is a medium mechs role in the game? A sniper (one gauss rifle... er large ... or ppc?), a light mech hunter (multiple streaks witha bap?), or is it a support brawler (high dps build with mgs, medium lasers, and missiles in streaks or srms?). They have a multiple roles but the only reason why you don't see more of them but more heavies and assaults is because people like playing heavies and assaults more ... bigger mechs means bigger weapons or more weapons and most people (not all) just like to feel the power at their finger tips ... or as it has been depicted ...

The problem is the "role" of medium mechs in the BattleTech universe is... to be cheaper alternatives to heavies, with more plentiful access to them. The thing about Battletech is each weight class after light is just a smaller version of the weight class above, really. Mediums aren't the "Sniper class" or "Brawler class." They're the "cheap" class.

You'd even have a place for slow mediums if heavies and assaults were increasingly rare.

The bottom line is in a tonnage limited game where there's only enough room to bring a handful of heavies & assaults, mediums dictate the battle, though - simply by being numerically superior and having similar handling.

Edited by Victor Morson, 10 November 2013 - 01:25 AM.

[LORD ORION]

GoManGo, on 10 October 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Making the Mediums nearly as agile as the lights is step 1. Mediums should be more like lights than heavies. Acceleration should be good, deceleration should be good, and so should turning. This needs to apply to mediums on up to assaults but more so in mediums. In a medium your underpowered outgunned and maneuver like a hay wagon so there is no getting away from the engagement after contact is made. So the poor slow medium gets blasted to HELLL!!!! in 2-5 seconds into the match why play one? A heavy might last a bit longer and players have figured out that in a assault you might last 1-4 minutes after heavy fighting starts so why not just play assaults to stay alive longer. Only other option is to buy a light and become a OP god and rofl stomp everyone which is a real joke it should take a light mech or mechs quite a effort to even bring down a well equipped medium with a skilled pilot. Instead PGI and devs are NOOBS and make it all instakill madness and anarchy.

This is exactly what needs to happen.

Mediums need to be agile.
They should have the best acceleration, deacceleration, torso convergence and the best ability to climb rough terrain.

Lights can usually go way faster, have smaller size profiles, and the ECM mechs (the ones people usually pilot) disappear easily enough.

Edited by LORD ORION, 10 November 2013 - 01:44 AM.

[Roland]

LordBraxton, on 09 November 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

I would really love to see a BV system, but we never will because the arguments over cost\balance would never end.

IF BV existed, even standard heatsinks could be a viable choice, you could try builds with minimal upgrades to get the most value for your team.

A while ago, I wrote up a thread about how to solve this issue, and the answer is to base value upon a dynamically calculated battle value based upon the relative usage stats from the prior time period (say, the last two weeks).

Thus, every two weeks, the usage of mechs and equipment is used to derive a value for everything in the game. Then, each team is given a total value to work with. For pugs, each individual group would get some value.

The beauty of this type of system is that it is effectively guaranteed to automatically adjust to the real value of weapons and mechs. It will automatically incorporate various aspects of balance, like mech geometry, which are inherently difficult to value.

It will also result in a constantly changing meta game, as teams are forced to work within a constantly changing value system. It will also dramatically reduce the workload of the pgi guys, as the system will largely self organize.

I'm tempted to write up a more detailed breakdown of how the system would work, to the extent of actually writing out the algorithm for value calculation, but I kind of fear it would fall on deaf ears.

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 10 November 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

A while ago, I wrote up a thread about how to solve this issue, and the answer is to base value upon a dynamically calculated battle value based upon the relative usage stats from the prior time period (say, the last two weeks).

Thus, every two weeks, the usage of mechs and equipment is used to derive a value for everything in the game. Then, each team is given a total value to work with. For pugs, each individual group would get some value.

The beauty of this type of system is that it is effectively guaranteed to automatically adjust to the real value of weapons and mechs. It will automatically incorporate various aspects of balance, like mech geometry, which are inherently difficult to value.

It will also result in a constantly changing meta game, as teams are forced to work within a constantly changing value system. It will also dramatically reduce the workload of the pgi guys, as the system will largely self organize.

I'm tempted to write up a more detailed breakdown of how the system would work, to the extent of actually writing out the algorithm for value calculation, but I kind of fear it would fall on deaf ears.

It kinda sounds good, except how would this be valid if say PGI decided a mini-contest where you need to troll with a flamer to win a prize, inflating the BV artificially? This also has to include those in lower ELO brackets where bad weapon usage tends to influence the telemetry. See LBX as one that would apply here.